Francis “Canonises” Pope Paul VI

Pope Francis has canonized Pope Paul VI, Archbishop Oscar Romero and five other saints.

This morning in St. Peter’s Square, before a crowd of about 70,000 people, Pope Francis presided over Holy Mass for the canonization of the saints while the Synod of Bishops on young people, the faith and vocational discernment is underway in the Vatican, Oct. 3-28, 2018.

He also proclaimed canonized saints Francesco Spinelli, Vincenzo Romano, Maria Caterina Kasper, Nazaria Ignazia of Saint Teresa of Jesus, and Nunzio Sulprizio.  To read entire report click here

Then click here to read a thoroughly documented commentary on “The Canonization Crisis” published on The Remnant website.

Comment:

I’d forgotten all about these canonisations until a fellow parishioner reminded me this morning after Mass.  We were talking about the widespread scandals of recent weeks and months, and she added that it was going to be all downhill from today.  I asked her “why today?”  She then reminded me that Pope Paul VI (pictured below with the six Protestant ministers whom he invited to help him create a new Mass, one that would be acceptable to our – increasingly – separated  Protestant brothers and sisters),  is now being rewarded for this scandal by “canonisation”.  Along with Archbishop Romero, advocate for the poor. I’m no expert on the life and times of Archbishop Oscar Romero, so this article is interesting – especially in its conclusion. 

     From left: A. Raymond George (Methodist), Ronald Jaspar (Anglican), 
Massey Shepherd (Episcopalian),
Friedrich Künneth (Lutheran),
  Eugene Brand (Lutheran),
Max Thurian (Ecumenical community of Taize).

Discussion point…

I NEVER refer to “Saint” John Paul II or “Saint” John XXIII.  Nor will I acknowledge “Saint Paul VI”.   Will you? 

Catholic Crisis: Who Shoulders Most Blame – Pope Paul VI Or Pope Francis?

February 9, 2018 Il Giornale Interview with Father Fausto Buzzi, SSPX (pictured) – Taken from Catholic Family News…

Fr Fauso Buzzi SSPX

Tradition represents the only possible future for the Church. Fr. Fausto Buzzi has clear ideas. A priest of the Society of Saint Pius X, founded by Marcel François Lefebvre on November 1, 1970, following the Second Vatican Council, Buzzi is today the assistant to the superior of Italy.
He fought for several years, in the Association Alleanza Cattolica (Catholic Alliance). Then, in 1972, came the meeting with Archbishop Lefebvre and his entrance into the seminary at Ecône. In this exclusive interview, the priest of the Society of Saint Pius X spoke about the doctrinal reunification with the Vatican.

What is still dividing the Society of Saint Pius X from the Catholic Church?

It’s good to clarify that the Society of Saint Pius X doesn’t have anything that separates it from the Catholic Church. We are united to the Catholic Church, and we’ve never been separated from her, despite the divisions with the authorities of the Church. Now, these divisions do not come from us. Archbishop Lefebvre always said that they condemned him, he who was the first to be praised by the Popes, especially Pius XII. It is Rome that changed, and with the Second Vatican Council distanced herself from the centuries-old Tradition of the Church. To be succinct, one can say that what separates us from Rome are grave and fundamental doctrinal problems.

A Catholic parish priest once told me: “They talked a lot about schism, but they never had the theological caliber of Archbishop Lefebvre.” Is that so?

Many criticize or condemn the Society of St. Pius X without knowing it, and without understanding the grave reasons for which place it in hostility with the ecclesiastical authorities. Today many people, priests and lay persons, are starting to ask themselves what is taking place in the Church, and are opening their eyes to the fact that those who have been labeled for many years as schismatics, are perhaps those who have remained the most faithful to the Catholic Church, and paradoxically, the most faithful to the Papacy. In our seminaries, Archbishop Lefebvre wanted us to study the Summa of St. Thomas Aquinas, and the other classical theology texts. I assure you, that it was a great grace for us to receive such a profound and solid formation.

What is your opinion on Pope Francis?

For us, Pope Francis isn’t any better or worse than the other Popes of the [Second Vatican] Council and the post-Conciliar era. He works “on the same building site” begun by John XXIII, that of the auto demolition of the Catholic Church, to construct another that conforms to the liberal spirit of the world. Actually, I’ll say something further: the current Pope is not as responsible as was Paul VI. This Pope saw the Council through, he finished it, he made all of the reforms. Now, all of this is the cause of the gravest crisis which we see in the Church. Certainly, these actions and words of Pope Francis seem graver than those of his predecessors. But that’s not the case. Today, it’s the media effect that makes things much more evident, than was previously the case. In substance, however, the actions of Paul VI were much graver than those of Francis.

But Bergoglio seems to have taken more steps forward, in your (the SSPX’s) regard…

Certainly he has not taken doctrinal steps forward, in our regard. Rather he considers us as an institution of the “periphery.” As such, we are the recipient of certain kindnesses on his part. When he was a cardinal in Buenos Aires, one of our priests brought him the life of our Founder to read. He read it, and was left with a serious impression; perhaps this, too, contributed to him having special consideration for us. Many ask themselves, however, why he wasn’t so kind to the Franciscans of the Immaculate who had been decidedly embracing Catholic Tradition. Instead, he treated them harshly, with extreme severity, to the detriment of mercy.

Many consider you “extremists” of the Faith…

Look, Faith is a theological virtue, it’s a theological virtue that can grow infinitely, because the object is God Himself, so there’s no limit to faith. In this sense, being extremists would be something virtuous. That said, I can quote the words of Our Lord when He said, for example, “He that is not with Me, is against Me” or the words of St. Peter: “there is no other Name under Heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved.” Tell me if these aren’t “extremist” words. If we then consider the Martyrs who died rather than betray their Faith, how do we judge them? As extremists? It seems to me than the sense of the Faith is being lost.

What do you think of the doctrinal debate surrounding Amoris Laetitia?

You’re causing me to repeat myself, with this question. If on one hand, all the initiatives to correct this document and to defend the Christian family (indissoluble and sanctified by a sacrament) have been praiseworthy, the true problem is upstream. Do you know where the root of Amoris Laetitia lie? We find them in the Council document Gaudium et Spes. Therefore, as I said the terrible crisis in the Church is traced back to her DNA, that is, Vatican II. Think about it: if, instead of Gaudium et Spes, Pius XI’s encyclicalI Casti Connubi was published in its place; would we have the catastrophic Amoris Laetitia today? I don’t think so.

What about the rehabilitation of Luther?

What do you want me to tell you? To rehabilitate the biggest heresiarch in history, he who laicized the whole Christian Religion, who caused the Church to lose entire nations, is a doctrinal suicide and the falsification of history. The rehabilitation of Luther is part of the ecumenical utopia of the past 50 years. A utopia which leads Catholics to apostasy, which is no longer silent but deafening. I suggest reading a new book on Luther published recently: Il vero volto di Lutero (“The True Face of Luther,” Edizioni Piane) written by one of our priests, a professor of ecclesiology at the seminary of Ecône. One will understand the absurdity of this false rehabilitation, reading this book.

Do you think a future doctrinal reunification between you and the Vatican, is possible?

I am not a prophet. I wish that this would take place, above all for the salvation of many souls who risk losing themselves for eternity. But if you’ll allow me, I want to tell you what we can do today to contribute to the triumph of Tradition in the Church. We must ourselves – each Catholic – bishops, priests and [lay] faithful, return to the Catholic Tradition of all time, and nobody must fear feeling themselves to be against the authorities of the Church. Because, in fact, this isn’t going against them, but on the contrary, it’s the most effective way to help them understand that returning to Tradition is the one and only future of Holy Church.   Source – Catholic Family News

Comments invited…

2018: The Year of “Saint” Pope Paul VI?

From Vatican Insider

In a special issue entitled “It will be the year of Paul VI Saint”, the weekly magazine of the diocese of Brescia,

La voce del popolo, writes that on 13 December, theologians of the Vatican Congregation for the Causes of Saints recognized a miracle attributed to the intercession of Pope Montini, after a first free go-ahead had been given by the medical consultation of the Vatican Congregation itself. At this point it is necessary that the cardinals of the Congregation and, finally, the Pope express themselves on the same miracle.

The miracle regards the birth of a girl from Verona called Amanda, who in 2014 had survived for months despite the fact the placenta was broken.

Pope Francis beatified his predecessor on 19 October 2014, concluding the extraordinary Synod of Bishops on the Family.

“Rumors are so insistent and the next steps so fast to take, that everything indicates 2018 as Blessed Paul VI’s canonization year”, writes the diocesan newspaper of Brescia. The last official stage took place last December 13 in the theological commission. The miracle attributed to the intercession of John Baptist Montini about the healing of a fetus in prenatal age in 2014 was approved. The expectant mother native from Verona, at risk of miscarriage, a few days after the beatification of Montini in Brescia, went to the Sanctuary “delle Grazie”, to pray to the newly beatified Pope.

Subsequently, a child in good health was born. After the doctors and theologians’ recognition, there are still a few more steps to be taken: the passage in the commission of cardinals, the final approval of the Pope and that of the Consistory with the official announcement and the definition of the date. But at this point, it is more than a hope. The month of October could be the right one. From 3 to 28 October in Rome, the 15th Ordinary Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on young people will be celebrated and will gather in the Vatican prelates from all over the world. What better opportunity to canonize in front of such a large portion of the College of Bishops, the other pontiff, after Saint John XXIII of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council? It will most likely take place on one of the first three Sundays of October, even if the most accredited date today seems to be the 21. Indeed, sooner or later, in 2018 Paul VI will be Saint! We praise the Lord to Whom we entrust the year that will come”.  Source

Comment:

Is this yet another questionable canonisation to come – the creator of the new Mass, in fact, a saint? Really? Or is this simply the latest attempt to “canonise” the Second Vatican Council and its scandalous aftermath? 

Why On Earth Do We Need Una Voce Scotland Or The Latin Mass Society?

FR JOHN BOLLAN, St Joseph’s Parish, Diocese of Paisley writes:

“I’m conscious of a dissonance in my own mind with regards to Mass in the Extraordinary form (sic).  It appeals to me aesthetically… And yet I make excuses. Perhaps my principal concern is that this Mass should not be a vehicle of protest or nostalgia, but something free of such baggage. In other words, the Mass is no place for the grinding of axes…” Click here to read the entire article (and click on image right, to watch a Traditional Latin Mass on video).

Attempting to uncover this priest’s age (he is kinder in his remarks about the Traditional Latin Mass than priests of the older generation although unfortunately he uses the modernist name “Extraordinary Form” and appears blissfully unaware that there IS a need to “grind axes”) I discovered an interesting incidental detail: that clergy lists seem to be disappearing from some diocesan websites; on one site, for example, there is a list of deceased clergy but not the parish priests still alive and, we presume, well.  Curious.

Anyway, while reflecting on Fr Bollan’s piece on the Mass published in the Scottish Catholic Observer, consider, too, the following piece written by Ellen, a member of the Catholic Truth team:

Ellen writes…

I was shocked by the article by Joseph Shaw, Chairman of the Latin Mass Society in England and Wales, published in the Catholic Herald, 1st September, 2017.
[Ed: in which he calls for “liturgical pluralism”: “Rather than throw every parish into confusion with a new top-down reform, it is better to foster the existing liturgical pluralism, which includes the reformed Roman rite…” [ i.e. the novus ordo – the new Mass]

Both the Latin Mass Society and Una Voce Scotland were established for the preservation and restoration of the Tridentine Rite of Mass. The chairmen of both these Societies seem to have lost sight of these aims.

I am really troubled by the hatred of the Traditional Mass that we have encountered recently from Novus Ordo going Catholics. The ignorance of these Catholics is appalling; they don’t see anything wrong in their going along with all the novelties introduced and which have in turn destroyed their true Sensus Fidelis.

What horrifies me is that the above Societies are spending their time and their subscribers’ hard earned cash on promoting heresies and on the cult of personalities. They have always, from their establishment, been too subservient to their bishops in the hope of a few scraps from the table instead of fighting for the right of every Catholic to serve God in the way Catholics have worshipped since time immemorial.

I think the time has come when all good priests who say that they prefer the Traditional Mass would stand up and say this Mass only. The parishioners are so entrenched in the new ways that they would require much education but with good leadership and encouragement it could be done. When the Cure D’Ars was first appointed to that parish, no-one attended Mass; he persevered and with his prayers and holiness eventually it became a great parish. Priests today must see that the real answer to their problems is the lack of that holiness. This can only come from the Holy Mass and Devotion to the Blessed Sacrament.

We, the laity who are aware and love the Mass must really rally round and not accept anything less. And if we truly love our neighbour we must try to encourage them to seek the nourishment they would receive from the truth rather than the insipid falsehoods peddled to them by false shepherds. END.

Comment:

When she speaks of the the hatred of the Traditional Mass that we have encountered recently from Novus Ordo going Catholics” Ellen refers to various conversations we have had in the context of spreading the Fatima Message.  The minute the issue of the new Mass is raised, so are hackles, and a tangible atmosphere of animosity and, yes, hatred quickly becomes evident – and this, we must emphasise, among the older generation, who should know better.  Safer to recommend attending a Salvation Army service than a traditional Latin Mass.

It’s all about what we enjoy, what we find beneficial – the very concept of offering true worship to God  doesn’t arise.  It didn’t arise, either, in Father Bollan’s piece. His claim that “the Mass should not be a vehicle of protest or nostalgia” is only partly correct; martyrs, like our own Scottish Saint, John Ogilvie SJ, died in defence of the Mass. It was essential to protest attacks on the Mass during the Protestant Reformation (more accurately, “revolution”) as it is essential, lamentably, to protest attacks upon it now – in the form a new Mass created in the most worrying of circumstances and for the express purpose of making it acceptable to Protestants.  Pictured below, Pope Paul VI with the six Protestant Ministers who actively contributed to the creation of the new Mass –  click on the photo to read an article on the subject, and see Michael Davies: Pope Paul’s New Mass for thoroughly academic coverage of this scandal, in the context of the history of the Novus Ordo Missae.

From Left: A. Raymond George (Methodist),     Ronald Jaspar (Anglican),
Massey Shepherd (Episcopalian),
Friedrich Künneth (Lutheran),
  Eugene Brand (Lutheran),
Max Thurian (Calvinist-community of Taize).


Father Bollan is right about the nostalgia though.  There should be no need for “nostalgia” – the Mass for which St John Ogilvie and the other martyrs gave their lives should be available in our parishes on a daily basis; it’s a dead cert that there would be sufficient priests to make it available daily, had the Second Vatican Council never darkened the doorstep of the Catholic world.  As it is, we have priests here today and gone tomorrow, because the new Mass does not nourish them – little wonder that it’s easier to find that needle in the haystack than a lengthy clergy list on diocesan websites today. 

So, things have developed quickly, from the pleasure at having a new Mass in the vernacular, to hatred of the Mass that nourished Catholic souls, and raised them to sanctity for many centuries.  How come Catholics have moved so far away from the very fundamentals of Catholic life and the truths of our Catholic Faith? And how come the organisations allegedly set up to preserve the ancient Mass for us, have decided to go along to get along, after all?

For,  Una Voce Scotland (UVS) and the Latin Mass Society (LMS) appear intent on organising everything and anything except a simple Low Mass in the local parish; instead they are organising sung Masses, High Masses, you name it, with members of the episcopate, including the recent visit to Scotland of Cardinal Burke, invited for the purpose of drawing large crowds, and perhaps some kind of kudos. Who knows.  What we do know is that some of us love the Low Mass, the peace, the reverence, the time to concentrate of the prayers of the Mass, the action of Calvary, but, it seems, that is not good enough for the Chief Executives who seek higher things, in a manner of (satirical) speaking.  

Perhaps it’s time to replace UVS and the LMS … or, on second thoughts,  perhaps not. Is it a case of “better the devil(s) you know…?”  Or is there any need for such groups at all, given that they are all too ready, as  Ellen writes, to accept the crumbs that fall from the episcopal table. Shouldn’t every knowledgeable Catholic simply encourage others to seek out a chapel of the Society of Saint Pius X, and go there for Mass, until they can persuade their Parish Priest to provide one in their local church? After all, it is to the sacrifice of Archbishop Lefebvre that the Chairmen of UVS and the LMS owe their living, so to speak.  But for that saintly Archbishop, there would BE no traditional Latin Mass available to us in this “post-Catholic” Catholic Church…  Below, to remind us all of that truth, is a short video clip on the subject. Then, share your thoughts…

Paul VI & Liturgical Abuse – The Truth

PopePaulVIFirstVernacularMass[Yesterday] mark[ed] the 50th anniversary of the first “Mass in Italian” to be ever celebrated, an event deemed important enough to be celebrated by the current Pope with a special commemorative Mass at the same church in Rome (Parrocchia di Ognissanti, Via Appia Nuova, 244) where it took place. The original Mass was celebrated by Paul VI on March 7, 1965 which happened to be that year’s First Sunday of Lent. The repeatedly vandalized plaque now marking the event (see source) goes so far as to say that it was this event that inaugurated the liturgical reform decreed by Vatican II. (The text of the plaque says, “On March 7, 1965, His Holiness Paul VI, inaugurating the liturgical reform decreed by the Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican, deigned to celebrate in this temple the first mass in Italian language, amidst the emotion and joy of an entire people, forever faithful and grateful.”) …

Nevertheless it is not true, as is sometimes implied in blogs oriented to the “Reform of the Reform”, that the 1965 Missal only allowed a modest use of the vernacular. The permission for the use of the vernacular in Inter oecumenici is sweeping and includes all the parts said or sung by the congregation: 

57. For Masses, whether sung or recited, celebrated with a congregation, the competent, territorial ecclesiastical authority on approval, that is, confirmation, of its decisions by the Holy See, may introduce the vernacular into: 
a. the proclaiming of the lessons, epistle, and gospel; the universal prayer or prayer of the faithful; 
b. as befits the circumstances of the place, the chants of the Ordinary of the Mass, namely, the Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus-Benedictus, Agnus Dei, as well as the introit, offertory, and communion antiphons and the chants between the readings; 
c. acclamations, greeting, and dialogue formularies, the Ecce Agnus Dei, Domine, non sum dignus, Corpus Christi at the communion of the faithful, and the Lord’s Prayer with its introduction and embolism. 
Granted, this same document (# 59) also stipulates that:
Pastors shall carefully see to it that the Christian faithful, especially members of lay religious institutes, also know how to recite or sing together in Latin, mainly with simple melodies, the parts of the Ordinary of the Mass proper to them.
However, there can be no doubt that the ecclesiastical authorities up to and including Paul VI knew that these reforms meant that Latin had been dethroned from its dominant place in the liturgy. What is more, he saw the “sacrifice” of Latin as the will of the Council, and this was while the Council was still ongoing. This is clear from his Angelus address on that same day:
This Sunday marks a memorable date in the spiritual history of the Church, because the spoken language officially enters the liturgical worship, as you have already seen this morning. The Church has considered this measure right and proper – the Council has suggested and deliberated it – and this in order to render its prayer intelligible and make it understood. The welfare of the people demands this care, so as to make possible the active participation of the faithful in the public worship of the Church. It is a sacrifice that the Church has made of her own language, Latin; a sacred, sober, beautiful language, extremely expressive and elegant. She has sacrificed the traditions of centuries and above all she sacrifices the unity of language among the various peoples, in homage to this greater universality, in order to reach all.
And this [also] for you, faithful, so that you may know better [how to] join yourselves to the Church’s prayer, so that you may know [how to] pass from a state of simple spectators to that of participating and active faithful, and if you truly know how to correspond to this attention of the Church, you will have the great joy, the merit and the chance of a true spiritual renewal.
And now let us also pray to the Madonna, we will pray to her still in Latin for now, so she can grant us this desire of an active and authentic spiritual life, and that she may grant us this reawakened sense of community, of fraternity, of the collectivity that prays together, of the people of God, so that we will certainly have assured to us the advantages of this great liturgical reform.
During the Mass itself, he began his homily thus:
The now new way of praying, of celebrating Holy Mass is extraordinary. The new form of the liturgy is inaugurated today in all the parishes and churches in the world, for all masses followed by the people. It is a great event, which will have to be recalled as the beginning of a thriving spiritual life, as a new effort in corresponding at the great dialogue between God and man.

Pope Paul VI also gave communion to the faithful who were standing: PopePaulVICommunionstanding

This was no accident; during the General Audience of March 17, 1965 Paul VI issued a scathing attack against the critics of the liturgical reform, and he explicitly includes among his targets those who criticize communion while standing. His remarks go beyond the critics of the liturgical reform and engages in a number of stereotypes of the faithful who attended Mass in the pre-Conciliar era, stereotypes startlingly similar to what liturgical progressivists have not ceased to repeat ever since.

 Intentionally celebrating the Mass facing the people, displacing the altar from the sanctuary (and in fact doing away with a tangible “sanctuary” in the traditional sense), covering up or removing the high altar, the use of a “table-altar”, communion no longer received while kneeling … we are often assured by “conservative” writers that these had nothing to do either with Paul VI or Vatican II, and in fact became widespread only years later, and against the express will of both. However, the records of this Mass and of Masses publicly celebrated by Paul VI in the years immediately after 1965 show that he was at the vanguard of these changes. This is ironic given the tendency in some Reform of the Reform circles to point to the “1965 Missal” as the way to resacralization and the return to tradition for the wider Church — a Missal whose very birth was attended by many of the innovations now deplored by these same circles.

Equally of note is that these innovations, which many in the Reform of the Reform camp assert have nothing to do with Vatican II because these are not mentioned in the actual text of Sacrosanctum Concilium, were already taking place in Rome itself, with the Pope’s own endorsement and in his presence, long before the Council ended on December 8, 1965.   Source

Comment

Please make sure you click on the source to read the above article in full. Could this Pope Paul VI who endorsed wholesale liturgical abuse in his new Mass from the get-go, be the same Pope Paul VI portrayed as hand-wringing and full of regret at the devastation wrought post-Vatican II, wondering from whence came “the smoke of Satan” that had “entered the Temple of God”?   Read the Rorate Caeli article and then share your thoughts… 

Pope Paul VI Enthusiastic About The Spirit of Novelty Within the Church

PopePaulVI3

Reader, Jim Paton from Perth, submitted the following extract from the text of the General Audience of Pope Paul VI on 2nd July, 1969. It is not available in English on the Vatican website, but you can read the original text by clicking on the photo of Paul VI. All emphases have been added by Jim, and all commentary below is from Jim in blue type.
We look forward to reading your thoughts on this rather startling speech from a pontiff due to be beatified in October. 

“Beloved Sons and Daughters!

We want to welcome the great words of the Council, those that define the spirit, and in summary form the dynamic mentality of many, inside and outside the Church, at the Council relate. One of these words is that of novelty. It’s a simple word, much used, very sympathetic to the men of our time. Flow in the religious field is wonderfully fertile, but poorly understood, it can become explosive. But it is the word that was given to us as an order, such as a program. Indeed there has been billed as a hope. It is a word bounced down to us from the pages of Scripture: “Behold, (saith the Lord). I will do new things “; is the Prophet Isaiah that speaks well; he echoed St. Paul (2 Cor. 5, 17), and then the Book of Revelation: “Behold, I am making all things” (21,5). And Jesus, Master, it is not himself an innovator? “Ye have heard that which was said to the ancients. . . But I tell you. .” (Mt. 5), he repeats in the Sermon on the Mount. The baptism, the beginning of the Christian life, it is not itself a regeneration? “We must walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6: 4). And so the whole tradition of Christianity, tending towards its perfection; it continually takes the concept of novelty, when he speaks of conversion, reform of ‘ascetic perfection. Christianity is like a tree, always in the spring, in the process of new flowers, new fruits; is a dynamic concept, it is an inexhaustible vitality, is a beauty.

 [Jim: I have never seen Scripture twisted like this before. This is diabolical]

A NEW SPIRIT

And the Council has presented us so. Two terms have qualified; renewal (cf. Lumen Gentium, n. 8 in the end; OptatamTotius, introd.), and update; this term, which Pope John gave free course, and was now in the current language, and not only in Italy (cf. AAS, 1963,p. 750); two words that speak of novelty; one referring to the field rather than inner spiritual; the other to the outer, canon, institutional. Our concern is very much that this “spirit of renewal”  (that’s how it is expressed by the Council: Optatam Totius, in the end) is to be all inclusive and kept alive. It responds salient aspect of our time, which is all in rapid and massive transformation, that is in the process of producing innovations in every area of ​​modern life. It rises spontaneously in the mind of the comparison: the whole world is changing, and religion is not?   It does not occur between the reality of life and Christianity, especially the Catholic one, a discrepancy, a detachment,mutual misunderstanding, mutual hostility, one runs, the other is still: how can they get along? how can it claim Christianity to influence life today?  And here is the reason of the reforms undertaken by the Church, especially after the Council; here is the Episcopate intent to promote the renewal corresponding to the needs of the present   (cf. Message to the Clergy of the Episcopate Trentino and South Tyrolean, 1967);   here is the Religious Orders ready to reform their statutes; here is the Catholic Laity qualify and articulate to the laws ecclesiastical; here is the liturgical reform, which everyone knows the extent and importance; here is the Christian education to re-examine its methods of pedagogy; behold, all the canonical legislation under review for renewal. And how many more consoling and promising new sprout in the Church in order to certify the new vitality, that even in these years so gory for religion demonstrates the continuous animation of the Holy Spirit! The development of ecumenism, guided by faith and charity alone is enough to score a progress almost unpredictable in the street and in the life of the Church. The hope, which is the Church’s gaze towards the future, fills his heart, and he says even as he throbs in new and loving waiting. The Church is not old, it is old; time is not the fold, and, if it is faithful to the principles of intrinsic and extrinsic his mysterious existence, the rejuvenated. It does not fear new; live by it. As a safe and fruitful tree by the root,it draws to itself every cycle its historic spring.”    Paul VI, General Audience of July 2, 1969. Source: Vatican Website

Comment

Along with the above, it might be worth mentioning, as it names Paul VI, the encyclical Redemptor Hominis (Pope John Paul II);  Article 3 states the following:

“Entrusting myself fully to the Spirit of truth, therefore, I am entering into the rich inheritance of the recent pontificates. This inheritance has struck deep roots in the awareness of the Church in an utterly new way, quite unknown previously, thanks to the Second Vatican Council, which John XXIII convened and opened and which was later successfully concluded and perseveringly put into effect by Paul VI, whose activity I was myself able to watch from close at hand.”

If it was unknown previously, then it it doesn’t belong to the deposit of faith. If it doesn’t belong to the deposit of faith then we can be assured that it isn’t the Spirit of truth that to which Pope John Paul II was entrusting himself. Further, the Popes have no mandate to teach this since it is novelty, which means that the faithful do not need to follow the new teachings of these men.

One other thing: where  Paul VI says “here is the Episcopate intent to promote the renewal corresponding to the needs of the present”  this goes against the perennial teachings of the Church, e.g.

“To use the words of the fathers of Trent, it is certain that the Church “was instructed by Jesus Christ and His Apostles and that all truth was daily taught it by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”Therefore, it is obviously absurd and injurious to propose a certain “restoration and regeneration” for her as though necessary for her safety and growth, as if she could be considered subject to defect or obscuration or other misfortune. Indeed these authors of novelties consider that a “foundation may be laid of a new human institution,” and what Cyprian detested may come to pass, that what was a divine thing “may become a human church.”   [Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832]